Congressman Scott Rigell’s Dilemma

I intended to move to Part 2, for yesterday’s blog, and got sidetracked on another blog story. I promise to get to the “Why”, for the Governor McDonnell veto. In the meantime, I do what I seem to always enjoy doing….. I digress.

I saw an article in Pilot Online that discusses the NO vote of Congressman Scott Rigell (R-VA), from the 2nd District. Bills becoming law have always held some fascination for me. It’s why I was a Political Science major in college, in the first place.

Political Science majors were always known as people that didn’t know what they wanted to major in, so it seemed easy and not too much of a commitment toward any specific career. I once heard a minister joke that the way that some knew that they wanted to be ministers in churches, was that “they woke up in the morning, craving chicken and not wanting to go to work”. Kinda like Poly Sci.

All that leads me to Congressman Rigell voting against the Federal budgetary deal, that funds the government through the remaining months of 2011. I have seen both sides of the aisle agree on voting against it and for it. In this instance, even liberal Independent Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) also voted against the budget bill.

This shows different philosophies arriving at the same ending. Sanders says he voted against it because it did not provide funding for programs that helped the poor and elderly. He thought the budget does not do enough in funding.

Congressman Rigell thought it didn’t do enough in reductions . He was the lone Virginia legislator to vote against it because it does not adequately deal with the budget deficit. He feels that, as a fiscal conservative, he could not vote for this spending bill.

Now, drawing on my old Political Science days, here is the interesting caveat. Rigell’s vote basically was voting to shut down the government. That would have the effect of shutting down government services; eliminating or delaying government worker pay; and halting or delaying military pay. The Second District (Rigell’s) has many government and military personnel that he represents…. His constituents that elected him.

Rigell said that passage of this bill increases the federal deficit. Such an increase “threatens the foundation of this country”

To me, some of this blog gets a bit boring until you consider the following question. As an elected Congressman, does he owe a duty to vote for his constituents or vote for what he thinks is best for the country. I suspect that the next election for Congress will have an ad that may ask prospective voters, that exact question. “Who does Congressman Rigell represent?” Kinda like trying to figure out the correct blog title spelling for “dilemma” or “dilemna”.

Any information herein on this website is not formal legal advice, nor the formation of an attorney client relationship. This website is designed for general information only. The Joel Bieber Firm does offer free legal consultations to help you decide if you have a claim to pursue.